Pennsylvania is going purple thanks to a Democratic victory, as Tom Wolf replaces Tom Corbett in the governor’s mansion. Alaska is still counting mail-in ballots, but the early results suggest that it, too, could shift toward split government – with independent Bill Walker as governor alongside a GOP legislature.

The outcome: more than one-third of Americans will live in purple states – with this election putting more than 40 million people newly in this category.

Answers will vary by locale, but residents of these states can in general expect something very different from the kind of bluster and inaction that frequently characterizes the federal government, with its rifts between President Obama and powerful Republicans in Congress.

Yes, state politicians can engage in their own share of grandstanding and gridlock. But several forces historically nudge state governments toward pragmatism and compromise.

State governments need to balance their budgets, for one thing, and governors often wield significant veto powers such as the ability to reduce or eliminate spending items they don’t like. Those rules can force two sides to the bargaining table.

Beyond that, state governments operate in a realm that’s not far removed from the voters they serve. Elected officials have highways to maintain and schools that need funding – and citizens who will hold them accountable if they don’t get the job done.

“In most states, most of the time, it’s eminently practical,” says Christopher Mooney, a University of Illinois political scientist who studies state governments. That includes states with unified as well as split control.

“In some ways it's going to be less divisive” in the purple states, Mr. Mooney says. “You’ve got to come more to consensus,” he explains, whereas single-party rule can sometimes lead to actions that rankle moderate voters as well as the opposition party.

Taxes and budgets will be at or near the top of priority lists in newly purple states. Republicans Bruce Rauner in Illinois and Larry Hogan in Maryland, for example, won upset victories for governor largely on voter concerns about fiscal management.

The tenor of purple government won’t be uniform across America.

In New York, a state Senate that’s now fully under Republican control may provide Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) with leverage against a Democratic House for his relatively centrist fiscal plans.

But, in contrast to the strong powers that governors typically wield, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon (D) will face an all-Republican legislature that now has a veto-proof supermajority.

Next year, well over 100 million Americans will reside in these split-control states, as will at least one office-holder who's a potential presidential nominee: Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey.

Still, the biggest share of Americans – nearly half – will live in states that are bright red. That Republican-state share won’t change much due to the election, although the composition shifts a bit. Republicans lose their lock on Pennsylvania but now have even fuller control of the South (with Arkansas), as well as the Plains and states in other regions such as Nevada.

The altered political landscape after this election is also a reminder of how fast things can change.

Before 2010, more Americans lived under Democrat-controlled states than under Republican ones.

Now, if Alaska ends up purple and Vermont’s legislature reaffirms Pete Shumlin (D) as governor, just seven US states will be Democratic, compared with 24 under Republican control and 19 with split control. That tally counts Nebraska as Republican in practice, even though its legislature is officially nonpartisan.

Follow Stories Like This

Get the Monitor stories you care about delivered to your inbox.

One reason state control can be volatile is that voters are often willing to consider governors of varying political stripes, even when legislative control is more consistently with one party.